EVE Search - Sticky:[Summer 2014] Pirate Faction Frigates

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Summer 2014] Pirate Faction Frigates

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 15 post(s)
Gypsio III Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 1132	Posted - 2014.02.26 01:03:00 - [1] - Quote I can't believe there are people defending the current Worm. If you want a 25/50 drone frigate, fly an Ishkur tbh.
Gypsio III Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 1133	Posted - 2014.02.26 11:52:00 - [2] - Quote A drone speed bonus really isn't that useful for the Worm. Yes, it lets your drones get to the target a bit quicker, but that's not really anything to write home about. The other case is that it would let your drones chase down very fast ships - but they still wouldn't apply meaningful DPS to it, because of the tracking and pulsing-MWD problems. Try fitting a few DNCs and sending Warriors off after a linked frigate - they're fast enough to catch it, but too fast enough to maintain a stable range and hence apply their DPS. Drone speed would be a pretty shoddy bonus.
Gypsio III Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 1133	Posted - 2014.02.27 08:58:00 - [3] - Quote IMO the only way to make a Guristas ECM bonus desirable is to give it a huge ECM strength bonus, then limit the ship to a single ECM mod. If you allowed it to fit any number of ECM mods, then the huge strength bonus would just be OP, so you'd have to have a weaker one, at which point you've just recreated any other ECM boat, which is a total waste of everyone's time. Or give it bonuses to ECM Bursts. FOF-Rattler fleets with bastioned/triaged drone bunnies! \o/
Gypsio III Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 1133	Posted - 2014.02.27 11:01:00 - [4] - Quote There's nothing unique about being a shield-tanked droneboat, at least not in any fashion that matters. When people talk about uniqueness and priate factions, they mean super neuts/webs or extreme mobility. One of the problems with the current Guristas (and Sansha!) ships is that they're just generic tank 'n' gank ships, that they offer nothing that other ships don't also offer. So the current proposal is worrying because it's just more of the same. The super drones are fun, but they have no really useful intrinsic ability, although when we get up to the Rattler, the volley damage of a cluster of assigned sentries might be a bit fun. Having said all that, it doesn't necessarily follow that a pirate ship absolutely needs a "special" ability. If the gank 'n' tank stats are powerful enough, it can still be desirable and of similar value to its counterparts. I don't know whether the proposed Worm is that ship, and we know nothing about the Gila and Rattler. So I don't really know what point I'm trying to make here... Anyway, if we don't need another ECM BS, another idea for a Guristas bonus is a bonus to all ewar strength, giving you the ability to fit TDs, RSDs, ECM or painters as desired. Also, let pirates get the most from pirate ships! Give all pirate ships a fourth bonus that is dependent on security status and hence only available to outlaws. If you're -10 you get the full strength bonus, if you're above -5 you get nothing. Disclaimer - I'm not an outlaw.
Gypsio III Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 1133	Posted - 2014.03.02 10:20:00 - [5] - Quote Medalyn Isis wrote: So Sansha being the best speed tanking ships in the Eve universe doesn't seem out of place to you at all? There are many valid complaints. For instance the a Gallente skill giving a missile bonus.... If you can't see how that is wrong then you need to stay away from balance. You're confusing lore with balance, in both cases. I hope I'm not doing you a disservice, but it strikes me that much of the complaining about Sansha seems to be coming from highsec Incursion runners who just want a tankier or gankier Nightmare.
Gypsio III Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 1133	Posted - 2014.03.02 10:37:00 - [6] - Quote I agree that the AB bonus might be OP at its current magnitude. But it's an interesting bonus that gives the ship a specific ability, worthy of a pirate faction ship. One of the problems with current Sansha and Guristas ships is that they're simply generic gank and tank ship, lacking the special abilities of superior factions, such as the mobility of Angels, the neuts and webs of Blood Raiders and Serpentis. Although the proposed Worm looks powerful, I'm still worried that it lacks the special something. Sansha doesn't, the AB bonus breaks Sansha out of that hole. Lore is nice and all, so just rewrite it. Blah blah blah... repeated failures of Sansha Incursions blah blah broke the strength of the Sansha fleet blah blah forced a change in tactics to faster more survivable ships blah. There you go.
Gypsio III Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 1137	Posted - 2014.03.03 11:36:00 - [7] - Quote Well, the shield bit of Sansha is fairly Caldari-y...
Gypsio III Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 1137	Posted - 2014.03.04 11:07:00 - [8] - Quote Well, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. So as long as you review these frigates a few months after introduction, things should work out in the end. But please don't do what was done with the last pirate faction rebalance, where nothing was reviewed and the Dramiel and Worm were left hilariously imbalanced for years.
Gypsio III Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 1137	Posted - 2014.03.04 21:51:00 - [9] - Quote Medalyn Isis wrote: The issue with Sansha having an afterburner bonus is not just regarding any preconception we may have of existing lore, but is more due to the fact that it completely changes current gameplay. Not at all. Succubus and Phantasm don't see any current gameplay, so what is there to change? And why would the AB bonus change the Nightmare, assuming that it doesn't lose its current damage output in the fashion of the Succubus?
Gypsio III Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 1137	Posted - 2014.03.04 22:55:00 - [10] - Quote You and you alone are flying the Phantasm, I fear. The Nightmare doesn't really need much of a boost. On it, the AB bonus will simply be an interesting option. The clever thing about the AB bonus is that it gives most help to the ships that most need it, as opposed to a uniform boost that makes the NM too powerful, mostly to the benefit of highsec incursioneers, and doesn't fix the ships that actually need help.

Gypsio III Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 1138	Posted - 2014.03.05 10:14:00 - [11] - Quote Why is the Nightmare the most important Sansha ship?
Gypsio III Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 1148	Posted - 2014.03.26 08:55:00 - [12] - Quote The problem with current Guristas ships isn't their tank, so I don't really see what throwing more of it at them via an extra medslot would achieve.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.